Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Putting things in perspective

by Aaron Wherry on Friday, October 8, 2010 10:40am - 0 Comments

The Prime Minister’s Office helpfully assures the country that Pierre Poilievre is not a threat to national security.

“He was in a rush and what he did was wrong but he recognizes that, he apologized for it and we think that’s appropriate,” said Harper’s spokesman Andrew MacDougall. “When they say security breach, it’s not like he smuggled in explosives or something,” he said.

Tags: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Chris

    Tough on crime my ass.

  • Standing By

    Contest: So if it had been a Liberal MP that hit the button, what do you think Pierre Poilievre's talking points would have been?

    • Jenn_

      "Those Liberals are so eager to take over the government, they're literally storming the doors!"

      "Liberals and their entitlement mindset. Too elitist to wait their turn like everybody else."

      "This is a very serious, illegal act. It directly impacts on the security of everyone in Parliament. And so, it is really an act of treason and Mr. Harper has directed the RCMP to investigate it as such."

    • bennji1977

      "As we witnessed yesterday, the Liberal MP has no regards for the safety and security of our citizens. Mr. Speaker, they are soft on crime, and continually attempt to undermine the great work our government in keeping our cities save, and keeping the terrorists off of parliament hill. Why is it that the Liberals do not care about the safety and security of those who work tirelessly for our great country."

      or

      "It was under the previously Liberal government that the hill security protocols were implemented – now they are trying to distance themselves from that tar baby"

      or

      "The Liberals – always entitled to their entitlements"

    • john g

      Irrelevant. If it had been anybody but Poilievre this wouldn't even be a story. The fact that this was the top story on National Newswatch this morning is ridiculous.

      • ChrisWPG

        Hogwash, if it had been any member of the opposition this would be blown so far out of proportion it would be ludicrous with Poilievre leading the chant.

        • burlivespipe

          Had it been the guy in the liberal policy plank holding a cigarette, all the Con muppets would be screeching bloody puppetry… But good to see you've got the 'deflect and blame' self-defence talking points at hand, gohn…

    • Dave

      Liberals are terrist sympathizers. Can we be sure they aren't actual terrists?

      • ChrisWPG

        Terrist: A terrist is a radical environmentalist or a self-proclaimed green anarchist who sees her or him self as heroically defending the Earth, or "Terra" (Latin), from humans or other forces acting through humans – typically ideologies or technologies, which they see as out of control. They may or may not profess the 'Earth immune system' ideology of Gaians.
        http://neohumanism.org/t/te/terrist.html

        • Dave

          Terrist: Neo-con pronunciation of what used to be a three-syllable word.

  • bennji1977

    I am going to try that line the next time that I am caught for speeding or running a red light.

    "Sorry officer – I know I did that, I am sorry, but you gotta understand, I am really late for this meeting"

    Think it will work?

    If you or I would have tried this stunt, we would likely be shot with those fancy new MP5 sub-machine guns, or at the very least get a good jolt from the trusted tasers.

    What is it with our MPs thinking that the same rules don't apply to them.

    • Dave

      "Sorry officer – I know I did that, I am sorry, but you gotta understand, I am really late for this meeting"

      Think it will work?

      No. But try adding, "it’s not like I'm smuggling explosives or something", and that will make it all better. If all else fails, biff a shoe. And whatever is in your pockets, you don't know how it got there.

  • craigola

    How hard is this to understand? He was late for a meeting and it was really important that he get there. If it was a parliamentary committee meeting, for example, without Mr. Poilievre there, that committee's work for the day was in serious jeopardy of getting done.

    • Loraine Lamontagne

      Then he should make sure that he's got plenty of time to get there on schedule.

      What's next with these disorganized bumblers – a prime minister making the leaders of the world wait while he goes for a bathroom stop?

      • YYZ

        Read it again Loraine…there was a (very clever) joke included.

    • burlivespipe

      Ah, subtle satire at its finest. Thank you.

    • Dave
  • tobyornotoby

    I'm no fan of PP, and it doesn't surprise me that he's impatient with the servants, but this hardly qualifies as a serious breach of security.

    If it's so important to wait for security to buzz you through, why is there a button that opens the gate from the outside? Wouldn't whoever we are defending the hill against these days be able to press that same button?

    • Jenn_

      Yeah, that was the real story behind this, wasn't it?

  • gottabesaid

    I truly believe this is no big deal… I hope the Liberals don't try to make more of this than it is. There is no political hay to be made here. At the same time… shouldn't he get a fine or something?

  • Anon ABC

    Parliamentary security breached not by homegrown terrorists, nor Tamil migrants …. but by an MP of the renowned Law and Order Party. This is too funny, no?

    Maybe he was just trying to get … in and out …. in and out … in and out … (remember that one)?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ottawa_Centrist Ottawa_Centrist

    Pierre Poilievre should use the same secret tunnel as Dimitri Soudas.

  • http://www.jesserosenberg.com Jesse_Rosenberg

    This really is only about the fact that he's a jerk.

    • burlivespipe

      I know, we should move on to unproven facts about the CONs now…

  • NorthernPoV

    rationalize all ya like:
    “When they say security breach, it’s not like he smuggled in explosives or something,”
    "but this hardly qualifies as a serious breach of security. "

    This was a serious breach of security.
    Or course, the air-headed PP is only an indirect threat – but ill-tempered-entitlement-type behavior at security checkpoints (much like Helena's) distracts the security people from their focus. It's why we don't allow hijack jokes at the airport. (jokers are treated very seriously)

  • ChrisWPG
    • bennji1977

      I have often found it really productive in a meeting to stare across the table at my colleagues with a piercing look while telling them to "go f*&k " themselves".

      Seriously, it works and almost always brings people around to understand my point of view on an issue.

  • Amateur Hour

    How NOT to be a communications professional:

    Andrew MacDougall, when trying to downplay the seriousness of a security breach, do not finish your remarks by flippantly introducing the concept of smuggling explosives. It makes your client look even worse … and proves you to be an incompetent.

    • Blue

      I missed that bit about Poilievre smuggling explosives. I thought that MacDougall said he wasn`t smuggling explosives.____C`mon, everybody lighten up.

  • LynnTO

    If I cannot trust the leaders of government to hold their temper, I cannot trust the leaders of government to manage the interests of the country without losing their sanity.

    Now, before I get hounded for saying so on the basis of PP's "single incident", let's keep in mind which leaders have been swearing at Torontonians, describing their former lovers as dogs, and flying off the handle at news conferences.

  • Mike T.

    Yeah, well, what happens when it's the Taliban in a Pierre Pollivere mask? eh? eh?

  • MostlyCivil

    We're making the checkpoint voluntary.
    The security gate was intrusive, and nobody likes being held up (in traffic) under threat of fine or loss of parliamentary cafeteria access

    • Dave

      But we're upping the sample, and asking 30% of vehicles to stop.

  • tobyornotoby

    Speaking of breaches … While we're all having fun being distracted by Pollievre (whose primary role is to keep us distracted in the first place) a serious breach of parliamentary privilege has been allowed to just slide by.

    Apparently Liberals agree with the Conservatives or are willing to tolerate ministerial interference in the attendance of political staff at parliamentary committees regardless of their involvement in issues important to the House.

  • John D

    So, this will get as much attention as Helena's airport indescretions, right?

  • LaxAtlDfwYow

    Typical Poilievre. He's a weasel and this sort of behaviour is exactly what one has come to expect from him.

    More troubling is the lack of meaningful response from his boss. Big law a order guys; but deliberately breaching a security checkpoint on the Hill is an "oops, sorry" kinda thing.

    It would cost nothing politically (and likely be beneficial) if an example was made of The Weasel ™. No doubt PMSH views The Weasel ™ as a kindred soul and he is thus undeserving of punishment.

    CTV reported last night that the PMO requested they not run the story and that Poilievre only offered the apology after CTV refused to hold it. Sweet.

Previous

Next

From Macleans